Is Virality Vital to Marketing?
As a marketer, I've seen countless fellow marketers struggling under the unsavoury expectations of virality---retweets, likes, shares, did you get them, if yes, how many, why so less?--sometimes the whole virality wagon assumes gigantically stupid proportions. Why this unnatural expectation that the moment you create something it has to be stratospherically viral?
Image credit: http://bit.ly/1kLnP7A
Do you think we need to move virality away from campaign success definitions? The whole practice of the virality of your campaign being celebrated as an industry case study or best practice is unfair. What is viral today, is history tomorrow, given the velocity of social media. I came across a really interesting read on virality (For Pete's Sake, Brands, Stop Focusing on Viral; read here). To further my point, I quote again "It’s remembered in this context as a case study, not as an example of the brand’s quality" (read more here). Virality, positive or otherwise, never sticks. You are paving the way for a bigger, better brand some day, and you end up being an also-ran. The idea is not to aim for virality & lose sleep over it, but if it does get viral, then good. Virality should not be a prerequisite for the quality of a campaign.
Do certain products even need viral marketing? In the already cluttered brandspace, does a customer really care for a new FB game? Are those marketers really hoping that this "game" is the most definitive engagement tool in a era of me-too brands? Does it make your customers want to buy that brand? Slightly questionable.
Do drop in your thoughts and experiences.
Comments
Post a Comment